dudeman Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 (edited) @ bipedal ape. dude why can't you chill out. you have rubbed me the wrong way since you took light of what i had to say in chat. if you don't believe or at least have an open mind, why are you here? just to cause problems and ridicule people? get a clue!!! edited due to the fact my post started a new page Edited March 17, 2012 by dudeman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimB Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 51 cameras? Any bigfoot photos yet? The answers are on the website at the Olympia Project. I'd imagine it would be easy for an educated man such as yourself to find that out. Good luck in your quest for proof!!! Tim B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bipedal Ape Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 chill.... that was a genuine question i was asking if he had any pictures yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 There´s Bipedal Ape and there´s Mulder, firmly in opposit camps. Are they rude, well sometimes. Are they stubborn, yes often! But I think at the end of the day, we need all the opinions to keep this interesting, while we are waiting. Both employe the same stile, not mine, but that´s OK, people are different. And I´m not blind to the fact that provocation in discussion might bring a discussion forwards - sometimes If someone goes to far, well then we have board-rules, moderators and the whole community chipping in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MikeG Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Don't forget the "ignore" button, folks, if it all gets too annoying. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bipedal Ape Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 mike please dont ignore me... i wouldnt want you to miss the post i make conceeding that bigfoot is real and then that pint i owe you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudeman Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 mike g. how do you ignore someone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jodie Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 Click on your username as it appears in the upper right hand corner of the screen. Choose "manage ignore prefs" in the drop down menu, it's self explanatory from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MikeG Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 (edited) mike please dont ignore me... i wouldnt want you to miss the post i make conceeding that bigfoot is real and then that pint i owe you I have no plans to ignore you, BA, and I'm looking forward to that pint. However, on a forum with as diverse a set of people as we have here, it is pretty easy to find someone that annoys you. The ignore button is better than the annoyance. I'm only here now because I could ignore Encounter. Now, i suspect we are diverting too far from the subject, which was the shooting of a couple of sasquatch............ Mike Edited March 18, 2012 by MikeG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Derek, Of the 51 cameras you have set up, what percentage would you say are next to or within the vicinity of a river or stream? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 That's a good question. I would say right now it's about 50%. We now have cameras in river drainage's such as the Quinalt and Queets, focusing on Elk calving areas. Every year in April a lot of tracks show up in these areas. The other 50% or so are still looking at ridge lines and predatory travel routes. DR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hutch Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 There are so many holes, inconsistencies, and illegalities in this shooting story to begin with that any one who is considered an investigator involved in this story should be ashamed. I personally would love to see BF proven – but it is going to take a body on public display to do so conclusively. I truly wish that if these two did kill these animals, they would have come forward and been forthright about them and at least presented the body of the small BF. All these bits, pieces, parts don’t amount to a hill of beans until a full-blown cadaver is presented. Bearing this all in mind, I am afraid that we are victims of yet another scam when you truly look into what they are saying. When you tell the truth, the story does not change – when you lie, any good investigator can make you crack and find the holes. First and foremost, forget the hearsay that abounds in so many second hand reports of this incident. They are all hearsay and have no weight. The only story that has any value is that which comes from the driver and or Justin Smeja himself. Let’s review the transcripts of Justin’s January 1st, 2012 radio interview. POINT #1 – JUSTIN SMEJA WAS NOT BEAR HUNTING AS STATED Justin Smeja: It was October 8th of 2010, and we’re going bear hunting up by Golden Lake. Was Justin poaching. I cannot say, but it is generally considered as poaching when you are taking or attempting to take a game species out of season. Please note this excerpt from the 2010 California Big Game hunting regulations GENERAL SEASON: The general season for black bears opens with the general deer seasons in deer zones A, B, C, D, X8, X9A, X9B, X10, and X12, and extends through December 27, 2009. In the remaining X zones, the season opens October 9, 2010 and extends through December 26, 2010. Bear season will close on December 26, 2010 OR when the Department determines that 1,700 bears have been reported taken. Assuming Justin is telling the truth about the general location of the kill as being near Golden Lake, he was hunting in zones X6A, X6B, or X7A as denoted on the California DFG state map on October 8th - one day before bear season opened! Justin was out bear hunting with a 25-06 rifle. This is a fine cartridge for deer, but most experts would consider it underpowered for bear, instead, opting for something in the .30 caliber range along the lines of a 30-06 or 300 Win Mag. No one wants to chase a wounded bear into the brush and that is why stopping power is important. POINT #2 – SHOOTING AND TRACKING THE ANIMAL Justin Smeda: … The truck stops. I pointed my rifle at it, and I could see it through the scope. I had my scope on 16 power….. Justin Smeda: … and it started to walk towards us, between 80 and 100 yards away… Now I realize that many out there are not hunters, but I can assure you that with a flat shooting 25-06, a scope on 16 power, and a very large animal that is only 80-100 yards away, Justin – again supposedly and experienced hunter – could have placed his shot anywhere he wanted. My question is, why did he chose a lung shot when he could have gone for a headshot. I have experienced the excitement and heart pounding adrenaline when you are about to take a shot many times, so I am willing to conceded this point to a degree. However, Justin has already admitted that he knew this was not a bear, so he really did not have to worry about the bullet bouncing off of a hard, angled skull. A head shot would have dropped the animal in place and he would not have had to worry about chasing it into the brush. Justin Smeja: “…and the little one is almost like straight uphill maybe 15 yards away, maybe 20, it’s is starting to approach me.†Justin Smeja: “…So I shoot it directly in the neck ‘cause I didn’t want to mess up the skull or the face.†Ever look through a scope at 16 power at close range? All you can see is fur. I have passed up on broadside shots on bear at 25-30 yards because I would not make heads from tails as to where the shot placement would be on the animal because my scope was set too high. Yet Justin made a neck shot on a moving animal at that close a range through a scope set on 16X? Not likely The next bone of contention that I have is that his partner, also an experienced hunter, would have made the choice to follow wounded, potentially dangerous big game into the brush without taking his own gun along – much less wounded big game with young to protect. I have hunted bear and have had to chase wounded bear into brush. Nothing this side of a war zone combat patrol is more terrifying. Only an inexperienced fool would go into the brush after a wounded animal unarmed. I seriously doubt that the driver would have made this error. POINT #3 – LEAVING THE BODIES BEHIND – NO EVIDENCE Justin Smeda: …“Dude, we gotta get out of here. Somebody just heard a shot, you know that somebody’s going to show up – Fish and Game. We’re going to get in so much trouble. We’re going to go to jail. We need to get out of here. This is crazy. Let’s go.†Why is Justin so worried about leaving the scene if he was hunting in a legal area with the proper game tags? If he was breaking the law by poaching or hunting on a game reserve, then the above comment makes sense. Besides, if the Dept of Fish & Game and other Government entities are so involved in a cover-up of BF, why would they cite you? They would have to have proof of what it was that you shot as part of the evidence to prosecute you. Pretty hard to put you in jail for killing a hominid without a body. I’d love to see a DA or someone from the State Attorney Generals Office bring you into court and charge you with killing a BF without a body, photographic proof, or the testimony of witnesses. Besides, regardless of what the creature was, Justin was breaking the law simply by leaving the animals behind and not reporting them to the proper authorities § 4304. Waste of flesh of game mammal or game bird prohibited No person shall at any time capture or destroy any deer and detach or remove from the carcass only the head, hide, antlers, or horns; nor shall any person at any time leave through carelessness or neglect any game mammal or game bird which is in his possession, or any portion of the flesh thereof usually eaten by humans, to go needlessly to waste. The provisions of this section shall not apply to game mammals taken under the authority of Sections 4152 and 4183 of this code. Some might argue that this subsection would not apply in this case, but I am sure that a judge would side otherwise considering the major scientific impact of the discovery of a new species that was either intentionally or accidentally killed. Furthermore, if Justin is hiding some body parts from this kill, or has sold parts of this kill to others, this too is a violation of Fish and Game laws. Sounds like no matter how you slice it, Justin is on record for breaking California DFG laws. With all these potential violations of law and the fact that Justin has reportedly been lawyering up, I am curious as to what law enforcement agencies have been knocking at his door? I also have to question the fact that they could not find exactly where they left the bodies. Ask most any hunter and they can take you to exactly the spot where they made a kill. Serial killers do this for the police all the time with folks they killed decades earlier, yet these two cannot do the same for something they killed less than a month prior? Additionally, Justin has many fine photos of deer he has taken in the field. This indicates to me that he usually has a camera with him on his hunts. Just about everyone I hunt or fish with does. Even if he did not have a camera on him, he likely had one in the truck whether it was a cell phone camera or otherwise. Neither of these guys had the forethought to take photos – especially if they are going to be publishing a book? Hell, I’d have filled the **** memory card…….. The basic fact of the situation is this – Justin and his hunting buddy are likely doing nothing more than pre press publicity for a fictional book they are writing. Please prove me wrong and I will be the first to publicly apologize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jodie Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 I think the incident happened on Oct. 10th, and the child was not sighted through a scope. As for why he left the body......he says he panicked and regrets the decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hutch Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 With all due respect, I have to go with what the shooter said himself on a radio interview that was transcribed which was Oct 8th, 2010. Likewise, he has already admitted to having a scope on his 25.06 which even if it was a Leupold Vari-X III in a 4.5x16, had he reduced it to 4 power, would have still been useless at a 20 yard range. He never admitted in his interview to not using the scope, so you are assuming he made a shot on a moving target from the hip and hit it in the neck? I am treating this like an investigator would. The radio interview was conducted on January 1st, 2012 so Justin had plenty of time to get his story straight and he stated on the recoord that he and the driver were hunting on Oct 8th, 2010. As far as the technical aspects of hunting, shooting, and animal recovery, these too are questionable. There is no reason to panic when you are legally engaged in a hunting activity. The only people I know who panic are poachers. Jodie, I too want to believe and as stated, I and I believe the rest of the BF community wish they had produced a body or series of photos to provide proof for once and for all. Unfortunately, from the standpoint of a hunter and criminal investigator, his story is so full of holes that it only adds to my skeptisism. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 (edited) You are correct he does state Oct 8 2010, and says he was Bear hunting, Golden Lake,Pascal Peak area? I can't be sure he is saying Pascal, or Cascal? I do not know anything about the zoning, but I do know he might be off on the location intentionally, and that might lead to some confusion. He also discuss's the 25-06 rifle, and mentions some guys feel that might be under powered, but he dismiss's that,and mentions he has taken many bear with this rifle. I agree with Jodie,he did not use the scope to site the little one, in fact, I think it was probably closer than stated when he shot it. I think some of the facts are confusing because we are not getting the full story, and I am not surprised by that, I am sure more details will come later. I do not think he panicked because he was poaching, I think he panicked when he got an up close personal look at the young one as it died. At that point I do not think he new what he shot, and was probably not interested in taking pictures for "evidence". I am sure felt he had done something wrong, even though he was not sure what. As for treating it like an investigator, then you would understand that some information would be with held for various reasons, rather than a full public disclosure. Everything from site security to potential evidence that would need review before it was presented. Just countering the discussion here,not looking to argue,just another view. Edited March 20, 2012 by JohnC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts